1823413 (Refugee)

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal considered the case of an applicant seeking a protection visa. The applicant, a Malaysian national of Chinese ethnicity and Buddhist religion, claimed to have left Malaysia due to financial difficulties and debt, seeking better opportunities in Australia. He arrived in Australia in March 2018 and subsequently suffered injuries in a car accident, which impacted his ability to work. The Department refused his protection visa application, finding he did not have a well-founded fear of persecution and that his economic hardship claims were not personal to him but affected the general population of Malaysia.

The legal issues before the Tribunal were whether the applicant met the criteria for a protection visa under the 'refugee' criterion or the 'complementary protection' criterion. Specifically, the Tribunal had to determine if the applicant had a well-founded fear of persecution for reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group, or political opinion, or if there was a real risk of significant harm to him as a necessary and foreseeable consequence of removal to Malaysia. The Tribunal also considered whether the applicant was a member of the same family unit as a person who met these criteria.

The Tribunal affirmed the decision to refuse the protection visa. It found that the applicant's claims of financial hardship were not sufficiently personal to constitute a well-founded fear of persecution or significant harm. The Tribunal noted that the economic situation in Malaysia affected the general population and that any economic hardship the applicant might face upon return would not amount to significant harm. Furthermore, the applicant did not satisfy the criteria for membership of a particular social group, nor was there any suggestion he was part of a family unit that met the protection visa criteria. Consequently, the Tribunal concluded that the applicant did not satisfy any of the criteria for the grant of a protection visa.